IANAL: It seems like that Disney thing would not stand up in court.
Posted by
JaxSean (aka JaxSean)
Mar 29 '23, 14:15
|
Otherwise, I would think any "board" could pass agreements good for 20, 30, 1000 years, then peace-out the next day and screw any incoming boards and their ability.
What am I missing that makes this at all iron-clad?
|
Responses:
-
And People wonder how Tom & Gisele got a quickie divorce in Florida. The Laws of Florida are somethin -- nm*
-
budice
Mar 29, 14:52
-
Duration in most of the agreement includes a "King Charles clause, which sets expiry 21years after death of last living descendent of King Charles -- (link*)
-
budice
Mar 29, 14:45
10
-
It's like a lame duck GOP dominated legislature removing powers from the newly elected DEM governor just before the assembly is dissolved! -- nm
-
Mop
Mar 29, 14:32
-
The brilliant part of the move is that it's exactly what Florida lawmakers just did.
-
David
Mar 29, 14:31
1
-
i don't think that matters. Disney can now question every single thing the new board does, right or not, and make their lives hell.
-
colin
Mar 29, 14:20
-
Did anyone read that as ANAL at first? No? OK... nevermind then... -- nm
-
Cuzzin Todd
Mar 29, 14:18
1
-
rule against perpetuities (not that i think that DeSantis and his goons are going to let a little thing like contract law get in their way) -- nm
-
hollywood big shot
Mar 29, 14:18
1
-
I dont know either. but this response here tells me they have no idea how to proceed -- (link)
-
Jovian
Mar 29, 14:17
|